It is VERY concerning to me that EA asks reviews to change grades. What do you think?

[roadman]

Quote: Originally Posted by cam780

I agree with roadman - the first paragraph sets up the entire read. If you read this review vs Bill Abner's blog there is a lack of depth that is apparent. Also I find the numbers themselves peculiar - if gameplay is so poor (62), how can replay be so high (85)?

My second issue was also how can reply value be high, but gameplay be poor? That one was a head scratcher.

[kcxiv]

Quote: Originally Posted by DSpezzano

Did you guys ever stop to think that maybe the metacritic average is important for other reasons. I am sure there are plenty of people at EA who don't really like the new direction of Madden as it is hard to sell. Perhaps a low average would result in something we all wouldnt like.

They are hoping to top 2K's football games i think.

[MattieShoes]

Quote: Originally Posted by Obelysk

Guys this is a business and if I owned a company I would do everything with in my reach to keep it at the top of the competition. This is nothing different than what happens in Washington D.C. with lobbyists.

Hahaha, competition.

And why would "lobbyists do it" make it less messed up? Are you cool with all the crap that happensin DC?

Incidentally, I'd love to see them re-review the game and say "with more time, we were able to find a lot more flaws in the game, the stale commentary became physically painful, etc. and lower the score. It's not going to affect MY decision but I just enjoy it when underhanded things backfire.

[GamingTrend]

Quote: Originally Posted by darthlaidher

thats funny they'er just asking lol theres more to it then that. they probably said change the score or we wont send you any more future maddens to review just like when alienware told certain mags to change the score or else no more pc's.

Nothing of the sort. They just want to make sure that we give them a fair shake. You have to see it from their perspective - would you want your pride and joy stepped on, especially after putting in so much work? Likely not - you'd defend it. As I've said before, they aren't pressuring us or strongarming us in any way.

Quote:

I agree with roadman - the first paragraph sets up the entire read. If you read this review vs Bill Abner's blog there is a lack of depth that is apparent. Also I find the numbers themselves peculiar - if gameplay is so poor (62), how can replay be so high (85)? But in the end, I don't put weight into the game sites reviews overly negative, or positive for that matter. The best place to get an idea as to how good a game is right here. Love it or hate it 98% of the opinions here are honest and those that aren't are transparent. But yeah, on this one I'm more concerned with the reviewer than EA questioning it.

As I mentioned - we recently changed our review structure significantly. It's unfortunate that this review may be a casualty of that. As for the scores themselves, realize that the replay is "Value / Replay" - as in, do you get something worth the $60 bones? It's one of the reasons we delineate the scores this way - suffice it to say that we've all played games that are absolutely and fundamentally broken, but damn are the fun and you just keep coming back to it. I'm not saying Madden 10 is that way (I'll have my copy tomorrow), but Keith is suggesting his experience was. I'm going to sit down with one of my other editors tomorrow evening and we are going to see what our experience with the game is like - who knows, maybe in the future Madden is one of those titles that we get more than one reviewer to tackle.

(sorry, it's the only pun I've got - it's been a long day)